Yet another blow to individual autonomy
One hopes the NIA probe into the Kerala ‘love jihad’ case doesn’t lead to the Special Marriage Act being repealed
India at 70 is indeed doing well in terms of everything and one takes pride in seeing her coming of age as a major global power. But if the success of a liberal democracy is assessed on the basis of individualism and rights of the individual, then it seems we are going in the opposite direction. Freedom of speech is being curtailed in the name of sedition even in violation of the Supreme Court’s order that mere words do not amount to sedition. Books are banned and films are censored because we do not trust individuals anymore. The right to privacy is also being curtailed, and now even freedom to marry a person of one’s choice is under threat.
Strangely even the apex court does not attach much significance to individual autonomy— in overruling the Delhi High Court judgment striking down Section 377 of the I PC, in not taking up the Aadhaar challenge for over two years, in the kinds of questions that came from the nine-judge privacy bench and, now, in ordering a National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe into the marriage of a 24-year-old graduate.
Decades ago in a case where a Class 11 girl had eloped with a boy, the court refused to punish the boy on the basis that the girl went with him on her own volition and was mature enough to take her decisions. In the current case, the Kerala High Court, which interacted with the girl and ordered a number of times thatthegirlis notunder anybody’s influence, suddenly got suspicious after the girl married a Muslim. It is now ‘love jihad’ because there was some discrepancy in her name in the nikahnama and the marriage registration request, the boy allegedly had a criminal case pending against him, his mother was working in West Asia and thus he was likely to ‘transport the girl out of country’.
The court ordered that she must complete her internship and expressed its displeasure that her marriage was without her parents’ concurrence. In a country where honour killings still take place, these observations not only show patriarchy but can also play havoc with the life of individuals who want to marry against the wishes to their parents or village elders. Also, the power to annul a marriage between two adults is not given to courts under the Indian legal system.
A change of religion is a private matter with which public officials should have nothing to do. Such conversion scan not be equated with terrorism in the absence of any authentic empirical study proving its existence.
The redeeming feature of the Supreme Court’s order is the supervision of the NIA probe by Justice RV Rave end ran. Let us hope that the Special Marriage Act permitting such marriages will not be repealed.